Christians are hypocrites when they use the Old Testament to rebuke people

[onlytruth]

is the oldest, longest living apostle and christian of his day wrong when he made that statement.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

I believe evangelizing is bringing good news that a person can be free from sin. For a person holding on to their sins there is only bad news.

I am free from sin, and I don't need your religious nonsense to be so.

This is because "sin" isn't an actual concept based in actual reality.

Without this "soul" thingy? It's meaningless. You have failed to prove there are such things as "souls", therefore? Your "sin" is unproven as well.

ooops!

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

I believe I don't care what modern people think. Most modern people are living in sin.

aaaaand there it is: The Self-Righteous Judgmental Attitude I have come to easily recognize among the self-appointed True Believers™.

Irony: Someone complaining about Modern, using.... the Internet, on a Computer small enough to hold in their hand....!

Shouldn't you be writing on papyrus or scraped goat skins with a charcoal stick?

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

You are lying. Do no twist my words and you do not know me.

Irony: The person complains of "you do not know me" immediately after posting several VERY JUDGMENTAL POSTS, that require actual TELEPATHIC UNDERSTANDING of the other person's innermost thoughts!

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

I believe we are guided by the Holy Spirit as to what is pertinent and what is not. It would be hypocrisy if we lived by old testament law but we don't. We live by every word that comes out of the mouth of God.

Including Ephesians 6:5, and Colossians 3:22?

How about 1 Corinthians 14:34?

Or my favorite: Matthew 10:34

Are these the words to be living by? Or words that modern folk recognize as being Evil?

Again: You failed-- utterly-- to explain how to live by the verses I listed above.

 

[Muffled]

I am free from sin, and I don't need your religious nonsense to be so.

This is because "sin" isn't an actual concept based in actual reality.

Without this "soul" thingy? It's meaningless. You have failed to prove there are such things as "souls", therefore? Your "sin" is unproven as well.

ooops!

I believe that works for self hypnosis but it won't work with God who will determine your destiny.

 

[Muffled]

aaaaand there it is: The Self-Righteous Judgmental Attitude I have come to easily recognize among the self-appointed True Believers™.

Irony: Someone complaining about Modern, using.... the Internet, on a Computer small enough to hold in their hand....!

Shouldn't you be writing on papyrus or scraped goat skins with a charcoal stick?

I believe I am righteous by God not by self. Your belief is based upon your own biases.

I believe tools are not sinful but men are.

 

[Muffled]

Again: You failed-- utterly-- to explain how to live by the verses I listed above.

Again I believe I live by the Holy Spirit so I only need to pay attention to verses if they are pertinent.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

I believe that works for self hypnosis but it won't work with God who will determine your destiny.

I'm not afraid of your beast-god who has to use torture or threats of torture to get and keep followers.

Because I don't believe your god is a real thing.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

I believe I am righteous by God not by self. Your belief is based upon your own biases.

I believe tools are not sinful but men are.

I do not have belief. I use fact-based outlook only.

Faith is absolutely useless at discovering the truth about reality.

And you? You are guilty of judgement-- which your bible says that you are condemned for.

ooops! You are not righteous at all.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Again I believe I live by the Holy Spirit so I only need to pay attention to verses if they are pertinent.

So, you are a hypocrite then. As I said before.

 

[Faithofchristian]

I hear Christians rebuke people all the time using Old Testament verses. That is totally hypocrisy because I can prove none of those Christians follow the Old law anyway. If they did, they would believe people should be executed for working on the wrong day of the week, adulterers should be stoned, and victims of rape should marry their rapist.

They quote verses like this:
Don't think that I came to destroy the law or the prophets. I didn't come to destroy, but to fulfill. For most assuredly, I tell you, until heaven and earth pass away, not even one smallest letter or one tiny pen stroke shall in any way pass away from the law, until all things are accomplished. Whoever, therefore, shall break one of these least commandments, and teach others to do so, shall be called least in the Kingdom of Heaven; but whoever shall do and teach them shall be called great in the Kingdom of Heaven.

While they ignore Matthew 22 Jesus replied: “ ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’
38 This is the first and greatest commandment.
39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’

40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”

He made it clear which law he wanted people to fulfill.

Christians love to quote the Old Testament to condemn others about "sins" that the New Testament says nothing about ( like graven images or contacting the dead).

First off, God approved of graven images in the Old Testament and even worked miracles through them. The new testament says nothing condemning the use of images to enhance one's spirituality or to use as decorations. Jesus would have known that Christians would use icons and statues, yet he said not a thing against the practice. It shows how much he or Paul or the Apostles even cared about the issue.

Also, contacting redeemed souls in Heaven is not condemned anywhere in the Old Testament. What is condemned is occult practices of holding séances where spirits are summoned from the pits of Sheol. According to Christian Theology, Christ atoned for all sins with his blood and redeemed the souls of the dead. Scripture says "The Gospel was preached to the dead".

Redeemed souls/spirits was not what the Old Testament was referring to, because spirits had not yet been redeemed (according to Christian Theology). Also, much of what was condemned in the Old Testament as being sinful was later permitted in the New Testament. See Acts chapter 15 when the Apostles decided the Law of Moses no longer needed to be practiced. If it is okay to talk to people while they are alive, why is it such a sin to talk to them after they leave their body behind?

So Christians quoting the Old Testament is nonsensical and hypocritical when it is used to judge, rebuke, correct, or condemn others!!!

To answer your question in your above statement you said
(They quote verses like this:
Don't think that I came to destroy the law or the prophets. I didn't come to destroy, but to fulfill. For most assuredly, I tell you, until heaven and earth pass away, not even one smallest letter or one tiny pen stroke shall in any way pass away from the law, until all things are accomplished. Whoever, therefore, shall break one of these least commandments, and teach others to do so, shall be called least in the Kingdom of Heaven; but whoever shall do and teach them shall be called great in the Kingdom of Heaven)

First of all those Christians have no idea or clue as to what law Christ Jesus is referring to.
They think the law Christ Jesus is talking about is the 10 commandment law. But that is not the law Christ Jesus is referring to.

If you read Matthew Chapter 5 Verses 3-19,

Notice in Verse 19--"Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments"
What least commandments, The one Jesus just gave back in Verse's 3-16.
Whosoever therefore shall break one these least commandments Verses 3-16.
And teach men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven.

 

[Hawkins]

The OT is the process of how the Jews were trained to be loyal to God. It is necessary such that God's message of salvation can be conveyed throughout history to reach today's humans.

God's job is to save the savable souls. In some culture such as the midianites', they allow the virgins to adapt the religion of their husbands. So they remain the only group of humans savable, that is, by marrying the Jews as their husbands. There are no free marriage in ancient times anyway.

 

[david-david]

I hear Christians rebuke people all the time using Old Testament verses. That is totally hypocrisy because I can prove none of those Christians follow the Old law anyway. If they did, they would believe people should be executed for working on the wrong day of the week, adulterers should be stoned, and victims of rape should marry their rapist.

They quote verses like this:
Don't think that I came to destroy the law or the prophets. I didn't come to destroy, but to fulfill. For most assuredly, I tell you, until heaven and earth pass away, not even one smallest letter or one tiny pen stroke shall in any way pass away from the law, until all things are accomplished. Whoever, therefore, shall break one of these least commandments, and teach others to do so, shall be called least in the Kingdom of Heaven; but whoever shall do and teach them shall be called great in the Kingdom of Heaven.

While they ignore Matthew 22 Jesus replied: “ ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’
38 This is the first and greatest commandment.
39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’

40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”

He made it clear which law he wanted people to fulfill.

Christians love to quote the Old Testament to condemn others about "sins" that the New Testament says nothing about ( like graven images or contacting the dead).

First off, God approved of graven images in the Old Testament and even worked miracles through them. The new testament says nothing condemning the use of images to enhance one's spirituality or to use as decorations. Jesus would have known that Christians would use icons and statues, yet he said not a thing against the practice. It shows how much he or Paul or the Apostles even cared about the issue.

Also, contacting redeemed souls in Heaven is not condemned anywhere in the Old Testament. What is condemned is occult practices of holding séances where spirits are summoned from the pits of Sheol. According to Christian Theology, Christ atoned for all sins with his blood and redeemed the souls of the dead. Scripture says "The Gospel was preached to the dead".

Redeemed souls/spirits was not what the Old Testament was referring to, because spirits had not yet been redeemed (according to Christian Theology). Also, much of what was condemned in the Old Testament as being sinful was later permitted in the New Testament. See Acts chapter 15 when the Apostles decided the Law of Moses no longer needed to be practiced. If it is okay to talk to people while they are alive, why is it such a sin to talk to them after they leave their body behind?

So Christians quoting the Old Testament is nonsensical and hypocritical when it is used to judge, rebuke, correct, or condemn others!!!

That is true. The new Testament does not speak against the above mentionings, I do not think. So true. So rather than worrying about what the New Testament says we should not do, why not look at what it says that we should do as Gentile Christians.

Acts 15:28-29 "For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things; 29That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well."

Why not try to abstain from meats offered to idols, to abstain from 'blood', from things 'strangled' and from fornication for a year or two and see what might occur? And since there are no modern 'pagan' temples to which persons dedicate their food offering to before they sell it at the market place, i guess we should not have to worry if any 'meats' in the grocery store was offered up to any 'idols'.


1494. eidólothutos
Strong's Exhaustive Concordance
meat offered in sacrifice unto idols.
Neuter of a compound of eidolon and a presumed derivative of thuo; an image-sacrifice, i.e. Part of an idolatrous offering -- (meat, thing that is) offered (in sacrifice, sacrificed) to (unto) idols.

see GREEK eidolon

see GREEK thuo


1497. eidólon
Strong's Exhaustive Concordance
idol.
From eidos; an image (i.e. For worship); by implication, a heathen god, or (plural) the worship of such -- idol.

see GREEK eidos


2380. thuó
Strong's Exhaustive Concordance
kill, sacrifice, slay.
A primary verb; properly, to rush (breathe hard, blow, smoke), i.e. (by implication) to sacrifice (properly, by fire, but genitive case); by extension to immolate (slaughter for any purpose) -- kill, (do) sacrifice, slay.


As the meat requirements of the growing number of residents in London steadily expanded, the meat markets both within the city and beyond attracted increasing levels of public disapproval.

By the early 19th century, pamphlets were being circulated arguing in favour of the removal of the livestock market and its relocation outside of the city due to the extremely poor hygienic conditions[7] as well as the brutal treatment of the cattle.[8] In 1843, the Farmer's Magazine published a petition signed by bankers, salesmen, aldermen, butchers and local residents against the expansion of the livestock market.


An Act of Parliament was finally passed in 1852. Under its provisions, a new cattle-market was constructed in Copenhagen Fields, Islington. The new Metropolitan Cattle Market was also opened in 1855, and West Smithfield was left as waste ground for about a decade, until the construction of the new market began in the 1860s under the authority of the 1860 Metropolitan Meat and Poultry Market Act.[9] The market was designed by architect Sir Horace Jones and was completed in 1868.


At the same time, the first large and centralized slaughterhouse in Paris was constructed in 1867 under the orders of Napoleon III at the Parc de la Villette and heavily influenced the subsequent development of the institution throughout Europe.

Slaughterhouse - Wikipedia

Until modern times, the slaughter of animals generally took place in a haphazard and unregulated manner in diverse places. Early maps of London show numerous stockyards in the periphery of the city, where slaughter occurred in the open air. A term for such open-air slaughterhouses was shambles, and there are streets named "The Shambles" in some English and Irish towns (e.g., Worcester, York, Bandon) which got their name from having been the site on which butchers killed and prepared animals for consumption. Fishamble Street, Dublin was formerly a fish-shambles.

An additional motivation for eliminating private slaughter was to impose a careful system of regulation for the "morally dangerous" task of putting animals to death.

---


U.S. could feed 800 million people with grain that livestock eat, Cornell ecologist advises animal scientists

August 7, 1997

U.S. could feed 800 million people with grain that livestock eat, Cornell ecologist advises animal scientists | Cornell Chronicle


The U.S, alone.

Top 10 Countries of 'meat' consumption Yr: 2009

Country: Kg/per/person/2002 - Kg/per/person 2009

United States of America 123 -120.2

Kuwait 60.2 -119.2

Greenland 113.8 -115.7

Australia 108.2 -111.5

Bahamas 123.6- 109.5

Luxembourg 141.7 -107.9

New Zealand 142.1 -106.4

Austria 94.1 -102

French Polynesia 112.2 -101.9


123 Kg. = 271.169 Lbs.- for year 2002
120.2 Kg. = 264.99 Lbs - for 2009

264.99 pounds/per/person with 306.8 million persons in the year: (2009)

= 81,298,932,000 pounds for year 2009 of 'meat' consumed.

81 billion, 298 million, 932 thousand pounds of 'meat' for the year 2009 in the U.S alone.

2009 had 365 days, i think.


2009 is not a 'Decade'.. it's 1 year.

81,298,932,000 for year 2009 is:

222,736,800 per day.

Or 222 million, 746 thousand, 800 pounds of 'meat' per day. In the U.S alone.

1 day has 24 hours or 1,440 minutes.

Which comes to approximately : 154,678.33 pounds per minute.

154 thousand 678 and a third pound(s) each minute.


So I'm assuming that these 'meats' are continually being 'slaughtered' round the clock all week, every day, each week, week after week, day after day to always be able to purchase 'meats' in the supermarkets before they go bad on the shelf.

 

[david-david]

If you wanted to become a 'strong' man or woman, spending a day or two on these slaughtering places could 'harden' a person up a bit, wouldn't you think?


List of countries by meat consumption - Wikipedia


U.S. could feed 800 million people with grain that livestock eat, Cornell ecologist advises animal scientists

August 7, 1997

U.S. could feed 800 million people with grain that livestock eat, Cornell ecologist advises animal scientists | Cornell Chronicle


This was in 1997, not 2009.


If you put a person next to a livestock, who would 'eat' more of the same 'grains' if they both were given the grains. The person or the livestock?


So instead of 'feeding' the livestocks daily, humans could be getting those 'foods', daily, and the livestocks could be grazing freely.




Could 'free grazing' livetstock have any positive effect(s) on any weather or climate concerns? Or would it be 'negative' effects?


Earth has lost half of its wildlife in the past 40 years, says WWF
Species across land, rivers and seas decimated as humans kill for food in unsustainable numbers and destroy habitats

Damian Carrington
Tue 30 Sep 2014 12.53 EDT


Earth has lost half of its wildlife in the past 40 years, says WWF


Humanity has wiped out 60% of animal populations since 1970, report finds

Mon 29 Oct 2018 20.01 EDTLast modified on Wed 31 Oct 2018 12.53 EDT

Humanity has wiped out 60% of animal populations since 1970, report finds


2014 to 2018

 

[Muffled]

I'm not afraid of your beast-god who has to use torture or threats of torture to get and keep followers.

Because I don't believe your god is a real thing.

I believe you will find hell to be boring unless you really think the flames are burning you.

 

[Muffled]

I do not have belief. I use fact-based outlook only.

Faith is absolutely useless at discovering the truth about reality.

And you? You are guilty of judgement-- which your bible says that you are condemned for.

ooops! You are not righteous at all.

oops. I believe you don't have a clue what you are talking about.

 

[Muffled]

So, you are a hypocrite then. As I said before.

On the contrary I believe I have stated what I believe and that is what I live by.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

I believe you will find hell to be boring unless you really think the flames are burning you.

Was I overly bothered by being formed in a SuperNova, wherein my atoms were formed from Hydrogen being fused into Helium, and so on, eventually becoming Oxygen, Nitrogen and Carbon?

The fact is, I was 100% unaware of those incredibly hot events. I have zero memories of any of it.

So I was not at all inconvenienced by them.

The same will be true after I'm dead. I'll be exactly as aware as I was before I was born. There will be no boredom. Just as there wasn't any before.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

oops. I believe you don't have a clue what you are talking about.

Oh, but I am clued in-- I know exactly what I am talking about-- you are going to HELL, (if hell were real). The bible is very clear: Judgement is Reserved for God and God Alone.

Not you. You? Well....

...you ought to be grateful to me, for pointing this out-- so you can quit worrying about other people's business, and get on fixing your own eye-speck.